Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

Free Agent Brandon Mebane

A critic begins writing about music because he is passionate about music. He wants, and lets just call it a "he", he wants to spread the word about smaller bands that are struggling and puncture a few bloated dinosaurs while he's at it. His enthusiasm for his work and clarity of intention leads to success. The music critic helps discover bands. The music critic helps shape popular interest in music. The music critic solidifies his standing by breaking the boundary between subject and artist: interviews bands, conducts festivals, and develops sources within record labels so as to be able to break news, host exclusive content and rub elbows with insiders.

The music critic becomes successful, and through the conventions and demands of that success, destroys that which made him relevant. The bands he once championed become the bloated dinosaurs, but having developed personal relationships with the bands, and having benefited professionally from those personal relationships, loyalty develops. A loyalty only a sociopath or an ubermensch could completely escape. The corruption, and it is corruption, makes the critic hard, cynical and the enthusiasm and wide-eyed passion he once sought and publicized emerging artist with diminishes. His profile, history, guilt, publicity and notoriety breeds self awareness, and that awareness forces him to second guess his opinions.

That's an extended metaphor, but it's also a bit of a cautionary tale. It's something I have thought about, both about others, and myself and my future as a football writer. Unlike the average music critic, I presume, I don't want to be a professional athlete (as many music critics would rather be musicians), never really aspired to be a professional athlete and do not even want to be close to and hang out with professional athletes. To wit: I am not a jock sniffer. As lame or unambitious as it might seem, I like to write and I like sports and I like to write about sports, and though I miss some content by not pursuing access and though I cap or at least delay my legitimacy by not pursuing access, I can not resolve how I can develop human relationships with players and stay, at least to the best of my ability, impartial.

Last year, Brandon Mebane's agent contacted me and we talked about setting up a publicity even for Mebane. See, Mebane is my favorite player and I think in some way I helped to spread the word about him. He is not my favorite player because I know him or want to know him. He is not my favorite player because I think he is among the best players in the NFL or even the best player on the Seahawks defense. He is my favorite player because he is good, and appreciating that he is good takes a little work and a little knowledge. Appreciating Mebane's ability helped me learn more about the game of football.

The problem is, at least within the arc of his current career, Mebane's best season is now two years past. Mebane was excellent in 2008. John Marshall used him as the one-tech complement to three-tech Rocky Bernard. I think it was sort of an unexpected success, which was part of the fun. Mebane substituted for an injured Chuck Darby and outclassed the aged veteran. He never relinquished the job. Despite playing three tech throughout college, Mebane's mix of quick first step, hand fighting, effort and, well, size and shape made him the rare run stuffer that could make plays in the backfield, collapse the pocket and even sack the quarterback.

His success led to Mebane taking over as Bernard's replacement at three tech. 2009 was a down season. Mebane could disrupt, but some of the bugaboos scouts tagged him with coming out of college resurfaced: he doesn't have great closing burst, isn't particularly fluid or agile and doesn't make many plays in space. Carroll replaced Mora, but defensive line coach Dan Quinn and defensive coordinator Gus Bradley were retained. Mebane became an under tackle. He worked mostly from the weak side in 2010 as part of a 3+1 line. He put on some weight so as to compensate for the Leo end. It was a better fit, but still not as good a fit, and I worry not a good enough fit to make the scheme work.

When Mebane broke in, he was a fourth pass rusher. Both ends were primary pass rushers. Bernard was 50-50. He could force a double team. He could make a play against the rusher. When it was a pass, he would attack a gap and pass rush. Mebane handled the dirty work. He was doubled more often than any other Seahawks lineman. He was tasked with the unenviable duty of withstanding consistent double teams. He, in all his awesomeness, regularly was able to fight back and fight through those double teams and make plays in the backfield. But he wasn't tasked with being a primary pass rusher. Mebane offered found pass rush from a position that didn't emphasize pass rush, and that more than anything is what I learned to love about his game.

As an under tackle though in the Leo system, Mebane is one of two players that must be counted on to provide pressure from a base defense. Colin Cole and Red Bryant collapse and control to their abilities. Cole is pretty much a run stuffer only, but a quality two-gap tackle. Bryant, like many 3-4 ends, gives you a little bit of everything: collapsing the pocket, setting the edge, deflecting passing, making plays in space and recording coverage sacks. Neither player should be counted on to provide consistent pass rush. That's up to the Leo end and the under tackle. Chris Clemons did his job. Mebane, well, Mebane flashed a lot of the core abilities that made him interesting in the first place, but just didn't create pressure consistently, and didn't consummate what pressure he created with quarterback hits and sacks. Mebane had a career low one sack and one quarterback hit in 2010. In 2008, he had 5.5 sacks and 18 quarterback hits.

Each system has its premium positions. Middle linebacker Brian Urlacher returning from injury and the signing of right defensive end Julius Peppers transformed the Bears defense from 22nd ranked in 2009 to fifth ranked in 2010. In some ways, we're still figuring out what the Leo system is and what it needs to work. But after a year (and in some ways two) of breaking down tape and thinking and testing my guesses, it seems to me that Seattle's premium line position isn't end, Leo or strongside. It isn't over tackle. It's the position manned by Brandon Mebane. This player must be stout against the run and, specifically, able to tie up blockers. He must be quick off the snap and able to make plays in the back field. But the biggest requirement, the requirement that makes it a premium position and not easy to fill, is that the under tackle must also be a great pass rusher. Otherwise, on too many snaps, pass rush is dependent on the Leo end. That's far too easy to game plan around and far too liable to break down and leave a pass rush toothless.

So though Mebane is still my favorite player, and a very good player, and though Mebane is a valuable free agent to a team in need of a Darby-style run plugger that also disrupts and creates pass rush (Chicago and Indianapolis spring to mind), I do not think he is a great fit for the Seahawks system and that system's requirements. Depending on his asking price, Mebane could still make sense as a rotational tackle. Every team that rotates its front four needs quality depth or else risks its second team unit being run over (See: Frank Gore, 2008 divisional round against Green Bay), but, well, here comes my corrupted side: does Mebane want to be a rotational tackle? He's better than that, and deserves to start. Maybe that's not my corrupted side. Maybe that's what little humanity I preserve from my Seahawks fandom.

Maybe Seattle signs him and attempts to overcome its pass rush limitations through scheme and by drafting developmental talent. Maybe Kentwan Balmer develops. He is, from a very broad tools perspective, a better fit. Most likely, I think, Seattle makes a play for someone like Albert Haynesworth, Shaun Rogers, Johnny Jolly or drafts a prospect like Marvin Austin or Kenrick Ellis. It may need a rare specimen at under tackle to make this defense go, but it just so happens a few of the best may be available.

Comment 79 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great Read!!!

Its hard to admit that your favorite player may not fit the team anymore but thats what makes us true fans is the ability to recognize that whats good for the whole team must take priority over our appreciation for our favorite athlete.

"C'mon somebody!" T-pain

by IMIN4LIFE on Jan 26, 2011 2:39 PM PST reply actions  

I've said for a while I don't think Mebane is coming back

I’m sticking with it even though I want him back. Not a good contract year coupled with injuries and an enticing DT market tells me Brandon will go.

Fire Gus "What's a screen?" Bradley.

by SSreporters on Jan 26, 2011 2:55 PM PST reply actions  

In his end-of-the-year press conference, Pete mentioned Mebane by name

describing the defense breaking down when he (and then Cole/Bryant) went down. He also mentioned a desire to build up the lines as an area of strength. Unless Mebane gets crazy offers from the FA market (either as a UFA or RFA, depending on the new CBA), I think he’ll be back. Pete recognizes his value and he’s been kind of hidden on the line the past couple of years.

How has Pete Carroll failed you today?

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 26, 2011 2:57 PM PST reply actions  

a very good point

they can still sign him as depth (I’m assuming they’d have to restructure his contract though)

Beam yourself up

I'm a one man rec'n crew

by jubelthebear on Jan 26, 2011 3:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Depth?

Move him to Over Tackle and make Cole into depth.

by bewrong on Jan 26, 2011 3:19 PM PST reply actions  

That was my thought as well.

Doesn’t Cole play the position Mebane excelled at?

by Nate Dogg on Jan 26, 2011 3:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Sort of but not really.

Mebane was one gap and stuff. Cole seems to man two gaps and contain. Cole is probably better at the latter, and that’s what (I assume) Carroll wants from his over tackle.

by John Morgan on Jan 26, 2011 3:34 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed... then he could potentially go back to being a GREAT complimentary tackle

Provided we were able to acquire a prototypical 3 tech which isn’t easy…

by Seahawks4life on Jan 26, 2011 3:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed again.

It just doesn’t make sense that the problem with the D-line is that Mebane isn’t good enough. An upgrade to that position (if that’s even possible) doesn’t change the dearth of talent elsewhere on the line. Mebane is good enough to play Under and Over Tackle, 1-Tech and 3-Tech. Getting an upgrade at his position doesn’t make getting rid of Mebane at all feasible, no matter the system.

by Groundhog on Jan 26, 2011 3:32 PM PST up reply actions  

That's what I was thinking

when I fanposted ‘lets trade for him’ last year (and it was suggested I was rosterbating)

I wonder if they could adjust the scheme a little. Mebane, Haynesworth and Cole could make a nice 3-guy rotation.

by seattl on Jan 27, 2011 6:25 AM PST up reply actions  

I say resign Mebane.

But I love fat guys who play football. I have to admit it’s not an entirely rational decision on my part.

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 3:41 PM PST reply actions  

Information question

I never seem to be able to hang onto this piece of information, so I have to ask again.

Is the under tackle and 3 technique the same thing? If not, what is the difference?

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Jan 26, 2011 3:51 PM PST reply actions  

For the Seahawks, under tackle plays the weak side. Sometimes the three tech, sometimes the one.

Three tech plays, well, the three tech. While he was a three, Mebane played mostly on the strong side.

by John Morgan on Jan 26, 2011 4:03 PM PST up reply actions  

I really need to get up with the modern defensive lingo.

But this has been bothering me. By “three tech”, do you mean he lines up between center and guard and covers the gap plus those two blockers? Or am I way off here?

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 4:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Okay, thanks.

That’s weirdly outside of where I’d expect him to be lining up but then again my idea of defensive formations is pretty wrapped up in what I learned from playing Front Page Sports: Football Pro.

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 4:23 PM PST up reply actions  

John is correct in that the 3-tech provides interior pressure because the sechme is designed like that in the 4-3.

Assuming the offense lines up in the formation above, and it is a pass play. The tight end will be out on a route, so we have 5 O-Line vs 4 D-Line.

The job of the weakside (5-Tech) end and the strongside (7-Tech) end is to force outside pressure while containing the QB. Mainly, both ends will rush the Strong D and Weak C gaps in order to speed/push the Tackle and attack their outside shoulder. Let’s say that both ends takes both tackles, leaving us with two guards and a center against our defensive tackles.

Now we see what the importance of the 3-Tech in a 4-line rush. Notice that the 3-Tech is positioned against the B gap shade of the right guard while the 1-Tech (Weak) is positioned at the left A gap of the center. Most teams would either force the center to block a blitzer coming in, but since we are rushing 4, the center has to be aware that the Weak 1 Tech could be on a stunt slanting to his right A gap – which makes the left guard lose leverage on him and opening up a blitzing lane at left B, disrupting the line’s rules of blocking. The 1 Tech could also force the LG and C double team him, so the center’s job has to check what the 1-Tech is doing before he can make a decision.

This brings us to our 3-Tech versus the RG. This is important because this is a one-on-one matchup with perhaps the fastest and clearest lane to the QB. Because of this, the 3-Tech has to win one-on-one; he is too far in position to cause a double team with the RG and C, and he also has to be the central pressure point from the defense. Mebane has not been allowing consistent pressure up the middle even though his position is designed one-on-one; this is why we failed to allow much pressure last season – the defensive ends would overush their lanes, opening a cutoff lane within the B gaps and allowing the QB to move, something that should not be happening if the 3-Tech is doing his job.

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 4:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Back in the day this was called an overshift.

But SOME people need to get with the times and those SOME people are me.

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 4:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Is this implied sarcasm?

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 4:44 PM PST up reply actions  

It's self-deprecating humor.

I guess the humor aspect is optional though.

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 8:17 PM PST up reply actions  

The 3-Tech also can't do his job if

The C doesn’t ever have to block the 1-Tech and automatically doubles the 3-Tech on every play.

by Groundhog on Jan 26, 2011 4:49 PM PST up reply actions  

That's true, but the 1-Tech should be getting to the QB every other play.

Because the guard can’t reach him if he’s lining up on his right shoulder and rushing at a hard, right angle.

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Which would leave a giant predictable hole

Vacated by the 1-Tech on every (or every other) play.

by Groundhog on Jan 26, 2011 4:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Our "1-tech" is playing more like a 3-4 NT than a 4-3 DT

His job isn’t to penetrate the gaps, its to maintain gap control.

How has Pete Carroll failed you today?

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 26, 2011 4:59 PM PST up reply actions  

You could say it's his job.

Or you could say he can’t do anything else.

by Groundhog on Jan 26, 2011 5:53 PM PST up reply actions  

I think you're trying to make an argument based more on reputation

that play on the field or an understanding of the scheme.

How has Pete Carroll failed you today?

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 26, 2011 7:38 PM PST up reply actions  

I think I understand the scheme

And the play on the field. I guess I’m implying that the scheme is limited and predictable because the available role players can’t go beyond their abilities. I’m suggesting that perhaps the scheme is designed to maximize the gross available D-line talent, but that doesn’t necessarily make for a good D.

John’s premise is that the scheme is inflexible, and therefore Mebane doesn’t fit. I happen to think the scheme can accomodate exceptional talent. It just doesn’t have that talent yet, with the exception of Mebane. There’s not much point to putting Mebane in the position he excells most at if you don’t have the role players to fill the positions around him. You say Cole is only being asked to fill gaps and stop the run because that’s what the scheme requires. I say it’s because he can’t do anything else.

Scheme vs Talent is being explored lower in this thread, so I’ll leave it at that.

by Groundhog on Jan 27, 2011 1:28 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah. Now the bit about the Seahawks' 4-3 playing almost like a 3-4 makes a lot more sense to me.

Especially the bit with Curry playing the 7 technique. He wouldn’t even need to get down into a 3-point on passing downs.

by Johnny Slick on Jan 26, 2011 8:19 PM PST up reply actions  

1-gap vs 2-gap responsibilities

Mebane’s job, most of the time, was to penetrate the gaps between players. This would put him in between two players. Cole’s job was to prevent a runner from traveling between either of two gaps. This leaves him, often, in contact with one blocker but responsible for twice as many gaps as Mebane.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 28, 2011 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm saying that they each have different responsibilities

which means its probably not a good idea to evaluate them using the same standards. If you assume they are both trying to do the same thing, then you might misinterpret what you’re seeing on the field.

In obvious passing downs, both Cole and Mebane often come off the field.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 28, 2011 11:13 PM PST up reply actions  

For instance

a 2-gap DT may be required to collapse the pocket while keeping an OL in front of himself, while a 1-gap DT may be able to rush the QB by traveling around blockers.

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 28, 2011 11:17 PM PST up reply actions  

He's 26. How often do we get a young, rarely injured DT?

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 3:53 PM PST reply actions  

Haynesworth for 2011!

With a significant salary restructuring and Washington giving us a pick for taking him off their hands!

(I can dream, right?)

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die, anymore than it ceases to be serious when people laugh." - George Bernard Shaw

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 26, 2011 4:09 PM PST reply actions  

And someone to light a fire up his ass?

No thanks. I don’t think Carroll can even motivate him.

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 4:11 PM PST up reply actions  

Indeed

Haynesworth doesn’t seem like the “buy in” “win forever” “always compete” type

Beam yourself up

I'm a one man rec'n crew

by jubelthebear on Jan 26, 2011 4:11 PM PST up reply actions  

Carroll's motivational system is interesting

If you don’t buy in, you’re out. It certainly convinced the team as a whole, but I’d sooner imagine Haynesworth as quickly going out than as successfully being converted.

by Thomas Beekers on Jan 26, 2011 4:13 PM PST up reply actions  

But Haynesworth would get to play the position he covets - pass rusher,

Rather than the Cole role of run stopper that he was asked to play in DC.

by Groundhog on Jan 26, 2011 4:23 PM PST up reply actions  

That's true. He might work hard for Pete

playing his natural position and not being called out everyday. People say We don’t want him he’s lazy, but I think there are reasons he didn’t play hard for Washington. He wasn’t lazy lazy before they moved him out of position and started messing with him.

What I’m wondering is, How would he and Mebane fit together on our D? Apparently not in our current scheme, but is that our dt’s fitting the scheme, or our coaches adjusting the scheme, to fit our talent? Cole is not the most flexible/versatile of players.

by seattl on Jan 27, 2011 6:12 AM PST up reply actions  

Trade up for Dareus?

I can dream can’t I?

I’m impressed with Austin. Certainly a guy with an awesome first-step would be ideal. I’m still learning who those guys may be. I really don’t see Shaun Rodgers as a fit. Maybe it’s just me.

Hasseldone.

by Misfit74 on Jan 26, 2011 4:30 PM PST reply actions  

I'm not a Marvin Austin fan at all.

He doesn’t play big and gets pushed around too easily. There are a couple scouting videos of him on youtube, he gets manhandled all game by Pitt and plays a little better against Virginia but is mostly just in on cleanup tackles.

by Nate Dogg on Jan 26, 2011 4:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Alan Branch from Arizona

6’6, 324 – 26 years old and Cards aren’t gonna tag him due to other potential FA (Breston, Hightower, Faneca)

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 4:50 PM PST up reply actions  

Of Breaston, Hightower, and Faneca

Branch would be the best tag. I think Faneca may retire.

Hasseldone.

by Misfit74 on Jan 26, 2011 4:53 PM PST up reply actions  

Thanks. I'll check those out.

I think we have to keep in mind that he’s been training for a year. Lifting weights no doubt and he showed up to the EW-Shrine practices in great shape. As young as he is, he’s probably already gotten stronger and can still improve further.

Hasseldone.

by Misfit74 on Jan 26, 2011 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Are Chuck Norris jokes no longer funny?

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die, anymore than it ceases to be serious when people laugh." - George Bernard Shaw

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 26, 2011 9:05 PM PST up reply actions  

Chuck Norris jokes are like Heath Ledger

they’ll never grow old

Beam yourself up

I'm a one man rec'n crew

by jubelthebear on Jan 27, 2011 10:23 AM PST up reply actions  

Heheh.

That’s darkly funny. I like it.

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die, anymore than it ceases to be serious when people laugh." - George Bernard Shaw

by Tyler Jorgensen on Jan 27, 2011 11:35 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm done with them.

Never liked them much in the first place. Humour’s so personal.

by djafrot on Jan 27, 2011 11:12 AM PST up reply actions  

How about make a play for someone like Albert Haynesworth, Shaun Rogers, Johnny Jolly or draft a prospect

Sign Mebane and move him over to Colin Coles spot. Is that more the spot he should be at in this defense?

by B.B.Finnegan on Jan 26, 2011 6:49 PM PST reply actions  

No

Mebane isn’t very good at 2-gapping. He’s strictly a 1-gap guy.

How has Pete Carroll failed you today?

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 26, 2011 7:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Why are the Seahawks scheming themselves out of all of their talented youth?

Jackson, Tapp, and now Mebane? Could not some defensive coach out there make something out of those guys, rather than jettisoning them for draft picks?

To top it off, the Leo’s unbalanced structure seems fundamentally broken. So we’re losing talent to change to a broken scheme. Great.

by djafrot on Jan 26, 2011 8:19 PM PST reply actions  

That's a bit of a overreaction

Jackson was probably going to bust anyways, and while we traded Tapp for a older Clemons, the latter did provide a career year – Remember that Pete likes to fit guys into his scheme (And who’s to say that the Leo position is broken?), not the other way around; if one person aren’t really going to be fast or strong enough at a particular position, why waste effort to try and make them fit into their scheme when they could bring in a guy with a better fit?

I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul - Invictus

by EequalsMc2 on Jan 26, 2011 8:34 PM PST up reply actions  

I dunno Jackson had 6 sacks and a FF, Balmer didn't do much. Clemons was a pleasant surprise

The Wilson deal is still highly questionable. I think it is a valid concern if the team that is as talent-poor as the Seahawks jettison a few of their decent younger players because they don’t fit the new regime, it does make it that much harder to rebuild. I do see both sides of this one, but I would like to see the players get a little bit of time in the new scheme to make their mark before getting discarded. shrug

by IslandHawk on Jan 26, 2011 9:50 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't know if I'd put Wilson in the "didn't fit the scheme" category.

I think his trade had more to do with the fact that his contract was expiring and he was probably looking for starters pay and we didn’t want to make that investment. The coaches seemed ok with what we had and valued a draft pick more than one more year of service from Wilson.

by eeezzbok on Jan 26, 2011 10:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't have a reference handy

But there was talk about Wilson being too small to play the type of press coverage the coaches wanted. Of course, most all I ever see out of our corners/scheme is a 10+ yard cushion, and lots of zone defense.

As I have learned from this board, the bend-but-don’t break philosophy somewhat relies on turnovers (e.g. rushing 3-4, hoping your DBs make some big plays). Wilson as a playmaker was sadly missed last year.

I personally (no way to really verify) believe that the coaches were expecting more ball-skill progression from Jennings, more overall early development from T3, and didn’t expect another down year from Tru. Perhaps they were expecting more from Babs and other deeper depth as well. Regardless, our CB play was pretty dismal overall by most objective measures I have seen.

by IslandHawk on Jan 27, 2011 9:05 AM PST up reply actions  

Wilson was something of a scheme mismatch

He plays the ball a lot better than he plays the man. The FO wants big corners that can play in man coverage. They thought Jennings and Wilson were similar in their abilities to play in those schemes and Wilson was the guy they could get something in return for.

They didn’t want to pay Wilson starter’s money to be a scheme mismatch, so they probably figured that what they got would be better than a year of renting Wilson.

How has Pete Carroll failed you today?

by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Jan 27, 2011 9:31 AM PST up reply actions  

". They thought Jennings and Wilson were similar in their abilities to play in those schemes"

If that’s what they think (and I’d love to hear a quote… lots of putting words in the FO’s mouth there), I’m really not impressed with them.

by djafrot on Jan 27, 2011 11:15 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed. Again, even a casual fan can notice their abilities are completely different

Jennings = sticks to his man like glue, can’t defend a pass, almost no career interceptions, slight and not a playmaker

Wilson = suspect in man coverage, ball hawk, playmaker, decent hitter, tier-1 NFL quickness, acceleration, great nickle / break-on-the ball zone DB

They probably do both share the fact they get tossed aside trying to run press coverage, and will tend to be abused one-on-one by #1 WRs

by IslandHawk on Jan 27, 2011 12:44 PM PST up reply actions  

Jackson had six sacks and a FF, yeah.

He also plays as a situational pass rusher on a line with much more talent than Seattle’s

SomaFM got me through college.

by Wayward Llama on Jan 27, 2011 6:08 AM PST up reply actions  

Maybe he's part of that talent?

Hmm? And maybe we shouldn’t have traded away Tapp?

by djafrot on Jan 27, 2011 11:16 AM PST up reply actions  

What has Balmer done for us? So far, Jackson->Balmer is a downgrade at this point

Just for the record though, I’m not giving up on Balmer yet, hopefully Pete and Bradley will find a way to motivate him and he will begin to flash 1st-round talent next year. It is hard to argue, however, that he hasn’t been underwhelming.

by IslandHawk on Jan 27, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Also that argument can cut both ways

If you accept the fact that our line is less talented (which I do), then it should also lead to relatively more playing time for Balmer, and opportunity to put up more tackles, sacks, assists, etc. (and the reverse is true). Neither player has set the world on fire, but, given his production I just don’t see that Balmer has been an upgrade, scheme fit or not.

by IslandHawk on Jan 27, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Jackson is also a special case with regards to scheme.

Pete knew what he had since he coached him at USC. It is kind of telling when a coach that tried to mold you to a scheme in college trades you.

by Bad Mayo on Jan 27, 2011 9:01 AM PST up reply actions  

I know that John and I have had disagreements about him in the past.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Mebane as a player and think his talent is well established, it’s just that he got so much press here and so much overexposure that I found myself trying to fight hype to really find what were the measures of his actual work.

This was a nice article in that regard. I think the Seahawks can’t really afford to let him walk. You know Mebane does some of these foundational things extremely well and I don’t think given his age that you can risk hoping you can find someone more physically skilled down the line. If Curry’s an example of how raw Physical talent can slow the growth of a players overall skills I don’t want to play Risk Reward with such a nice piece already in the hawks laps and someone who you can move in pieces around and expect the similar types of performances against the run at least. I’d rather turn Cole loose and see if a move can be made there.

by Joshua Kasparek on Jan 27, 2011 3:17 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

SEA!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Help Me Understand How Irvin Will be Used
Turbin_game_uni_small
Hand Size and Quarterbacks
Einstein_www-txt2pic-com_small
On Pete Carroll and Previous QB Competitions

Recent FanPosts

Small
Just How Much Do Close Games Matter Anyway?
Horsey_small
Results from the 2012 Armchair GM Championship
Tasb_logo_small
Consider it Spun: The 5 Worst Moves of Carroll and Schneider Era in Seattle
Small
Plaxico Burress: viable option, or over the hill?
Small
Portland Seahawks Fans: Where You Be?
Small
Should Seattle Go After Kellen Winslow?
Small
Football where the head is sacred
Horsey_small
What Doug Baldwin Had to Say About Seahawk QBs (or How DB Throws MF Under the Bus)

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor/Lead Writer

Screen_shot_2012-05-04_at_10 Danny Kelly

Staff Writers/Editors

Screen_shot_2011-01-05_at_9 Scruffy Lefty

Small BrianL

Avatar_small Benne

Olympiabeer_small Tyler Jorgensen

Madhatter_small Thomas Beekers

Profilepic_small DJ C-Raig

897267_o_small Kenneth Arthur

Sbn_pic_small Jacson Bevens

Photo__1__small Charlie Todaro

Staff Writers

Small Joshua Kasparek

Photo_small Matt Erickson

Davis_small Davis Hsu

Profile2_small Rob Staton

208114_505637750968_23709013_30160241_9483_n_small Scott Enyeart

Elephant_pink_clothes_small Chris Sully

Seattle_seahawk_white_1600_reasonably_small_small Derek Stephens

Ace_small Ben Harbaugh

Bu_fb_2_small Daniel Hill

Rob_small Rob Davies